The long and short is that our enterprise responded more than four times to an RFQ that was initially advertised in October 2014. After responding to the initial advertisement and subsequently informing the supply chain contact personnel of the department in question about some flaws on the RFQ, we were invited to communicate with the end user department. Whereby we ended up exhausting a considerable amount of valuable hours educating them about the product and service they were trying to procure. Eventually the RFQ was re-advertised using an improved specification thanks to the critical information we share with the end-user and their supply chain " which was previously unknown to them". Upon re-advertisement we responded but got sideline in favour of a supplier that was more expensive. As it turned out that supplier then approached the end-user three weeks after they had been issued a PO to confess that they had no clue what they were supposed to supply. The after their PO was cancelled and the RFQ re-advertised the third time around. As per usual we responded and again the PO was issued to a more expensive supplier who later also conceded that they could not supply the required product. Their PO was cancelled and on the fourth occasion the there was no re-advertisement but the matter was adjudicated based on recommendation from the end-user between only two suppliers which our enterprise was one of. This time the PO was not issued to again because now we were more expensive apparently. We know that there are people involved in corrupt dealing in this department but can't source the proof to substantiate our claims however if Treasury investigated they would find piles of evidence that can only be obtained through access to internal documents that we can't access. If you care to follow up on this matter then contact me and I shall give more details provided may anonymity will be guaranteed. You can reach me on 084 981 2051 or 011 575 1722.

Regards,

S